Allowed

M/S Knitpro International v. Anurag Sanghi and Anr.

Delhi HC20 Jul 2016CS(OS)/2142/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Delhi disposed of two suits pending between M/s Knitpro International and Anurag Sanghi & Anr. The court considered applications for withdrawal and compromise. After accepting the validity of the signed compromise submissions, the court allowed the applications and decreed the suits accordingly.

What did the court decide?

Applications for withdrawal decreed as per compromise applications; suits decreed accordingly; parties to bear own costs.

M/S Knitpro International Vs Anurag Sanghi… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Delhi HC (2016)

¶1

$~2 & 12

¶2

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

CS(COMM) 432/2016 & IA No.20852/2015 (u/O 39 R-2A of CPC), IA No.20853/2015(u/O 26 R-9 of CPC), IA No.20854/2015(u/O 39 R-4 of CPC), IA No.21353/2015(u/O 39 R-2A of CPC), IA No.23022/2015(u/O 8 R-1 of CPC), IA No.23033/2015 (u/O 8 R-1 of CPC) & IA No.8438/2016 (u/O 23 R-3 CPC)

¶4

M/S KNITPRO INTERNATIONAL ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. S.K. Bansal and Mr. Ajay Amitabh Suman, Advs.

¶5

Versus

¶6

ANURAG SANGHI & ANR ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Gaurav Miglani and Mr. Samreen Khan, Advs.

¶7

AND

¶8

- CS(OS) 2142/2015 & IA No.14757/2015 (for stay), IA No.14758/2015 (u/O 13 R-2A of CPC), IA No.14759/2015 (u/O 39 R-2A of CPC), IA No.14760/2015 (u/O 39 R-4 of CPC), IA No.21352/2015 (u/O 39 R-2A of CPC) & IA No.8437/2016 (u/O 23 R-3 CPC)

¶9

M/S KNITPRO INTERNATIONAL ..... Plaintiff

¶10

Through: Mr. S.K. Bansal and Mr. Ajay Amitabh Suman, Advs.

¶11

Versus

¶12

ANURAG SANGHI AND ANR. ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Gaurav Miglani and Mr. Samreen Khan, Advs.

¶13

CORAM:

¶14

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW O R D E R

¶15

% 20.07.2016

¶16

The counsels state that the disputes subject matter of both the suits have been settled on the terms contained in the compromise application filed

¶17

Page 1 of 2

¶18

in each of the suits.

¶19

The counsels further state that the applications have been signed by the parties concerned / their authorised representatives and are also accompanied with the affidavits of the said persons and that they, as counsels, have also signed the compromise applications.

¶20

The counsel for the defendants clarifies that the defendant No.1 Mr. Anurag Sanghi in both the suits has also signed as the constituted attorney of M/s Sanghi International, defendant No.2 in each of the suits; that M/s Sanghi International is a sole proprietary of Ms. Kavita Sanghi, wife of Mr. Anurag Sanghi; that he has just now realised that the Power of Attorney executed by Ms. Kavita Sanghi in favour of Mr. Anurag Sanghi is not on record.

¶21

The counsel for the defendants however on enquiry states that he has personally satisfied himself that Mr. Anurag Sanghi has authority to sign on behalf of his wife Ms. Kavita Sanghi.

¶22

I do not see any reason to disbelieve the statement of the counsel for the defendants.

¶23

I have perused the compromise applications and find the compromise as arrived at between the parties and as contained therein to be lawful.

¶24

The applications are allowed.

¶25

The suits are decreed in terms of the compromise applications which shall form part of the decree sheet in the respective suit, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.

¶26

Decree sheet be drawn up.

¶27

RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J.

¶28

JULY 20, 2016/ bs..

¶29

Page 2 of 2

M/S Knitpro International v. Anurag Sanghi and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Knitpro International v. Anurag Sanghi and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shweta Tiwari Vs the Editor-in-Chief, Amar Ujala & Co.

Jagdish Singh and Anr. Vs International Airport Authority of India and Ors.

Apollo International Ltd. Vs Supriya Pharmaceuticals Ltd.

Subhash Chand Kalra Vs Inder Kumar Kalra & Ors.

The Polo/Lauren Company L.P. Vs M/S Mery Mans & Ors.

Naveen Chauhan Vs Raj Kumar Chauhan & Ors.

M/S Metso Minerals Singapore Pte Ltd. Vs M/S Villayati Ram Mittal & Anr.

Shri Islam Vs Sunder Singh and & Ors.

Apollo International Ltd. Vs Supriya Pharmaceuticals Ltd.

Escorts Construction Vs Action Construction

Microsoft Corporation & Anr. Vs Manish Pateria & Ors.

M/S St. Ives Laboratories Inc. Vs M/S Ives Drugs (I) Pvt. Ltd.

Ashland Licensing and Intellectual Property Llc & Anr. Vs Dinesh Mahajan & Ors.

M/S Knitpro International Vs Anurag Sanghi & Another